White House snubbed

Q

QuickSilver

SF VIP
Location
Midwest
I'm surprised we didn't have a thread on this.. John Boehner and the GOP congress has bypassed the White House and invited Netanyahu to address Congress on why we shouldn't have nuclear negotiations with Iran. Nothing about this plan was even mentioned to the Administration and completely puts at risk any chance of a peaceful control of Iran's nuclear program by placing Sanctions on Iran.

Boehner, R-Ohio, asked Netanyahu to address the threats posed by Iran's nuclear ambitions and the rise of the Islamic State. The invite came a day after the president's State of the Union Address in which Obama warned Congress against enacting new economic sanctions against Iran.
Click to expand...


To which was responded:

"New sanctions passed by this Congress, at this moment in time, will all but guarantee that diplomacy fails, alienating America from its allies, and ensuring that Iran starts up its nuclear program again," Obama said Tuesday. "It doesn't make sense. That is why I will veto any new sanctions bill that threatens to undo this progress."
Click to expand...


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/01/21/netanyahu-address-congress/22103577/


Now correct me if I'm wrong.. but isn't it only the PRESIDENT who negotiates foreign policy? Boehner's stunt seems to fly in the face of normal procedure. BUT... when it comes to embarrassing and demeaning this President.. who cares about protocol or even the Constitution for that matter.


The United States Constitution divides the foreign policy powers between the President and Congress so that both share in the making of foreign policy. The executive and legislative branches each play important roles that are different but that often overlap. Both branches have continuing opportunities to initiate and change foreign policy, and the interaction between them continues indefinitely throughout the life of a policy.
Click to expand...
This report identifies and illustrates 12 basic ways to make U.S. foreign policy. The President or the executive branch can make foreign policy through:

1) -- responses to foreign events
2) -- proposals for legislation
3) -- negotiation of international agreements
4) -- policy statements
5) -- policy implementation
6) -- independent action.

In nearly all of these circumstances, Congress can either support the President's approach or seek to change it. In the case of independent Presidential action, it may be very difficult to change policy in the short term; in the case of a legislative proposal by the executive branch or treaties and international agreements submitted to the Senate or Congress for approval, Congress has a decisive voice. In most cases Congress supports the President, but it often makes significant modifications in his initiatives in the process of approving them.

Congress can make foreign policy through:

1) -- resolutions and policy statements
2) -- legislative directives
3) -- legislative pressure
4) -- legislative restrictions/funding denials
5) -- informal advice
6) -- congressional oversight.

In these circumstances, the executive branch can either support or seek to change congressional policies as it interprets and carries out legislative directives and restrictions, and decides when and whether to adopt proposals and advice.
The practices illustrated in this report indicate that making U.S. foreign policy is a complex process, and the support of both branches is required for a strong and effective U.S. foreign policy.
Click to expand...


http://fpc.state.gov/6172.htm
 

QuickSilver said:
I'm surprised we didn't have a thread on this.. John Boehner and the GOP congress has bypassed the White House and invited Netanyahu to address Congress on why we shouldn't have nuclear negotiations with Iran. Nothing about this plan was even mentioned to the Administration and completely puts at risk any chance of a peaceful control of Iran's nuclear program by placing Sanctions on Iran.




To which was responded:




http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/01/21/netanyahu-address-congress/22103577/


Now correct me if I'm wrong.. but isn't it only the PRESIDENT who negotiates foreign policy? Boehner's stunt seems to fly in the face of normal procedure. BUT... when it comes to embarrassing and demeaning this President.. who cares about protocol or even the Constitution for that matter.




http://fpc.state.gov/6172.htm
Click to expand...

Seems like the guest speaker would fall under 5) informal advice.

True it would be preferred that the branches of government would coordinate their efforts but sometimes perhaps it is better that an issue get full disclosure and/or both sides of the story because in the end the American citizen and taxpayer winds up with the bill.

This also could a be planned distraction for negotiating. Obama could tell the Iranians look I can't hold the hardliners at bay any longer so what are you going to do-now.
 

WhatInThe said:
Seems like the guest speaker would fall under 5) informal advice.

True it would be preferred that the branches of government would coordinate their efforts but sometimes perhaps it is better that an issue get full disclosure and/or both sides of the story because in the end the American citizen and taxpayer winds up with the bill.

This also could a be planned distraction for negotiating. Obama could tell the Iranians look I can't hold the hardliners at bay any longer so what are you going to do-now.
Click to expand...

Part of the problem is that it's always been US policy to not engage with Heads of State within such close proximity to their elections. Netanyahu's would be two weeks after coming here.. The President will NOT meet with him IF he comes to visit. Judging from the flack he is getting from all sides.. my guess is that he will re-think the wisdom of accepting Boehner's request. Boehner needs to hang his head on THIS particular fiasco.
 
There's no question that this snub is a world class insult for the American administration with Netanyahu and Boehner equally guilty of reckless irresponsibility. We've learned in Iraq and Afganistan and Libya that there are no military solutions in the Middle East. So Obama's administration is endeavoring to deal with the problem of Iran's nuclear potential through negotiation. In this he is supported by most of our allies. But Netanyahu and the GOP aren't big fans of negotiations. So together they intend to sabotage the Iranian negotiations and they'll probably succeed. It's really tough being a Democratic president these days when the GOP's avowed and only goal is to sabotage everything you try to do.

 
Well, sad news for you posters and the truth is that since we have been pulling back our troops and not talking sternly anymore the situation in the Arab states has been, and is, continually going worse and worse.

Another surprise today was when the Democrat side of Congress also decided to tell Obama to quite pussy footing around and get Iran to make a real commitment to stop any nuclear activity. They also gave Obama a dead line of March this spring in 2015. They also want action just as the Republicans have been asking for. New York Senator Chuck Shumer made that speech.

So who are we going to blame now?
 
Don't trust Iran but in reality we can't be telling another country what they can do with in their borders or if we try to keep them in the dark ages ie deny them technology that they won't "binge" on it once they do get it. And a "binge" for Iran might very well be a nuke and/or wmd attack on someone.

That being said perhaps it is time to ease some sanctions or negotiate hopefully pulling in some moderates. But the second we find a wmd, I mean really obvious not even a spy photo needed for then a preventive strike or even harsher embargo could be ordered. I still think there is some good cop bad cop going on here.
 
Prosecute Boehner for violating Federal Law? http://www.politicususa.com/2015/01...eaker-john-boehner-violating-federal-law.html

When Boehner conspired with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress to campaign and “send a clear message to the White House” about how Israel will set America’s foreign policy in the Middle East, he violated a 216 year old law.

A law, by the way, devised and enacted by America’s Founding Fathers that Republicans claim are their exemplars. It is now time to finally call for Boehner to be charged, tried, and convicted for violating the law and put a stop to his career-long abrogation of long-standing ethical and legal provisions to send a clear message that no-one in America is above the law.

The Speaker of the House openly violated the so-called Logan Act that was signed into law and enacted in 1799 by President John Adams and codified in 18 U.S. Code § 953.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
Click to expand...
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.​
Click to expand...


The Code addresses precisely what Speaker of the House John A. Boehner did in conspiring with Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress to defeat the measures of the United States in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States.
​
The Logan Act prohibits any “Private correspondence with foreign governments” and reads; “Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

The Supreme Court ruled that Congress cannot and should not conduct foreign affairs; that power rests in the Executive Branch exclusively.
In the 1936 Supreme Court case, United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp, the Court held that “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President. It is given implicitly and by the fact that the executive, by its very nature, is empowered to conduct foreign affairs in a way that Congress cannot and should not.”

Boehner just does not, and Republicans cannot, accept that yes, “all ability to conduct foreign policy is vested in the President;” regardless of the fact he is an African American man or that Republicans’ allegiance is to a foreign power; in this case Israel.

Boehner violated the Logan Act just by “directly commencing or carrying on any correspondence with a foreign government, or agent thereof” with his admitted and explicit intent of influencing measures of the United States.

Boehner did say publicly that his reason for illegally corresponding with Netanyahu was to “specifically ask him (Netanyahu) to address Congress and send a clear message to the White House about our commitment to Israel.”

Boehner’s hubris, defiance, and obvious disregard for longstanding U.S. law was when he publicly said, “Congress can make this decision on its own.” No matter what Boehner says, or thinks, Congress cannot make that decision on its own according to a 216 year old law and reiterated by the 79 year old ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Boehner needs to be fully prosecuted under 18 U.S. Code § 953 to teach him that no American is above the law regardless what he thinks. Obviously, throughout Boehner’s political career he has considered himself above the law.


This is not Boehner’s first offense without facing any legal action or congressional ethics violation repercussions to remove him for various acts. He was caught red-handed, and admitted to handing out corporate bribes for favorable votes on the floor of the House that garnered expulsion for another Ohio congressman guilty of corruption.

Boehner openly, and continues to, lie about the number of jobs the KeystoneXL pipeline will create since he bought stock in seven Canadian tar sand companies in 2010; a few months before becoming Speaker of the House. In 2013 the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) began an investigation into campaign finance violationsand like Boehner’s other instances of malfeasance; nothing is done to put a stop to his criminality; likely because he is white.


It is difficult for regular Americans to understand how unarmed African Americans are gunned down in cold blood, and then tried and convicted in absentia (because they were murdered) by a hostile justice system when men like Willard Romney openly violated SEC and bankruptcy laws with impunity.

Or, how seditious malcontents like Cliven Bundy can defy federal court orders and summon armed militias to confront and aim their weapons at federal officials in the commission of their duty; a federal offense and sedition, and face no charges.

Every year across the nation evangelical clergy violate the conditions of their tax-exempt designation, videotape their illegal acts, and dare the IRS to take punitive action.

Former president George W. Bush and his co-conspirator Dick Cheney proudly boast that they authorized torture of captive enemy prisoners of war, many innocent, and nothing happens. Now, the Speaker of the House of Representatives blatantly violates an over-200 year old law, boasts about it, and the Justice Department and congressional ethics committees turn away in what; fear?


One often hears politicians, including President Obama proclaim with authority that “no-one in America is above the law.” Americans certainly understand that is undoubtedly one of the biggest lies, and farces, being parroted time and time again with no chance in proverbial Hell of ever changing. John A. Boehner is a sleazy, crooked politician, and although handing out corporate bribes for votes, lying to manipulate tar sand share prices, and taking illegal campaign donations are crimes, they pale in comparison to conspiring with a foreign nation’s leader to “influence and defeat foreign policy measures of the Unite States.


John Boehner’s most recent crime is not up for debate, or opinion; he deliberately and with substantial malice aforethought violated the Logan Act and Americans must demand that he be charged, tried in federal court, and convicted with his own confession that he defiantly “carried on any correspondence or intercourse an officer of a foreign government to defeat the measures of the United States” because Israel has a dispute with the United States of America’s Middle East foreign policy.



 
As it has been told for several years now, we are not telling Iran they can not have nuclear energy for health, power, what ever they desire. What the UN and many other countries than the US, we want real assurance there are no bombs being planned.
 
So the White House has been snubbed, is that Obama, or our whole government? Snubbed, is that supposed to mean that someone didn't include them on a list to be invited somewhere, or what? I mean, if someone "snubs" someone I've always been told not to take it personally.

Now, is there something we should be upset about? If so, someone mind filling me in?
 
Dame Warrigal said:
Snubbed? More like given the finger.
What good, if any, is likely to come of it?
Click to expand...

And in violation of the Constitution. Only the President can negotiate foreign policy. The congress wants to derail any successful negotiations with Iran regarding their nuclear program by placing sanctions on them... This will naturally cause Iran to walk away from the talks with the Administration and go full speed ahead with their program... So I have to wonder why Netanyahu doesn't want peaceful negotiations to continue? Does he WANT the US to go to war with Iran? Probably so... so WE can fight his war for him.. with OUR blood and treasure.

Fortunately the President can veto any Sanctions Bill.. and NOW the Democratic Senators who supported Sanctions have pulled back.. so the veto will not be over-ridden. But this whole thing is just nasty business and more evidence that the GOP will go to ANY means to demean and oppose this President no matter what.. even if it hurts our country and sends our troops back to war. Man... they love war.
 
rkunsaw said:
Congress has the authority to invite whoever they want to address congress. Obama has been repeatedly illegally snubbing congress and you love it. Now it went the other way and you can't stand it.
Click to expand...

Not quite the same.... This is dangerous stuff... AND what the President has done... he has had the authority to do.. Boehner may have the authority to invite anyone to speak, but this quite obviously has one purpose.. to undermine the President and the peace negotiation. I suspect Netanyahu will reconsider this folly..... and he should if he continues to expect the US to be his sugar daddy. Boehner should hang his head... he is getting dangerously close to being a traitor.
 
Standing independent of the President is one of the Congresses activities, it is their job to protect the people wishes. Also, the President does not have permission to start wars as some have suggested. The President can only declare war for a short period of time and then the Congress must come on and approve if they agree with the Presidents actions.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...gress-shall-have-power-to-declare-war/379189/

[h=1]'The Congress Shall Have Power ... to Declare War'[/h] President Obama is compelled to get permission before striking Syria, but if he violates the law by unilaterally ordering a strike it won't be the first time.
Conor Friedersdorf Aug 27 2014, 8:53 AM ET

Conor Friedersdorf Aug 27 2014, 8:53 AM ET


lead.jpg
Kevin Lamarque/Reuters Senators Bob Corker, Rand Paul, and Tim Kaine agree: Congress should be consulted before President Obama takes any more military action in Iraq or Syria. "This fight, and the threat posed by ISIL, is serious enough that Congress and the administration must be united on U.S. policy going forward,” Kaine said in a statement. “I urge the administration to use the next two weeks to clearly define the strategy and objectives of its mission ... then bring it to Congress for a debate and authorization vote.”


President Obama knows the Constitution demands that. Before taking office, he was a U.S. senator and a lecturer in constitutional law at the University of Chicago, so he had expertise to draw upon when asked about the war power in 2007. "The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation," he told the Boston Globe.

(And more)
 
nwlady said:
I know, it doesn't sound like a big deal. Maybe it's the wording of the OP. It doesn't seem news worthy.
Click to expand...

It's the wording used in almost every news or opinion report on the topic. I certainly didn't hear the word snub here for the first time, and it is appropriate. Too bad it goes deeper than a snub politically.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_01/of_all_the_things_to_get_the_v053876.php



Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s snub of President Obama at John Boehner’s invitation is all the rage in Washington these days—and not in a good way. Even Fox News commentators lambasted both Republicans and Netanyahu not only for the transparent campaign ploy for his re-election, but also for breaking the protocols of Washington decorum. Politico today ran a blistering broadside by David Rogers titled “There Are No Rules Anymore.”

All the criticism is right, of course. Both Boehner and Netanyahu are guilty of massive political overreach, making an unprecedented and foolish insult to the President of the United States, the single most important person for Israeli security.

And all, apparently, over disagreements over Iran policy—disagreements on which Netanyahu and Republicans are transparently wrong, as more bellicose policy against Iran will only make the problem worse and harm Israel’s security.

On the American domestic side, it’s a wildly inappropriate move by Republicans, essentially co-opting a foreign power to desperately try to win a few political points against the President with their evangelical base and maybe with the votes of a few American Jews.

But really, of all the things for Fox News and the Washington establishment to turn on Republicans for, it’s this? A protocol breach that basically amounts to the diplomatic version of little Susie not getting invited to Nancy’s tea party with the rest of her stuffed animals? Everyone already knows that Netanyahu hates Obama, and everyone got a chance to see how comically pouty was Boehner’s reaction to the President’s State of the Union address.

Where was all the outrage when Republicans literally lied the country into war with Iraq? Or repeatedly cut food stamps for no reason? Or shut down the government? Or voted over 50 times to prevent people with pre-existing conditions from having access to health insurance? Or voted for the Paul Ryan budget? Or refused to acknowledge human-made climate change?

Somehow all of those crucial things that harm millions of people and weaken our national security became partisan issues for the Village Center to tut tut about and ask for compromise. But Boehner and Netanyahu’s social snub is somehow the last straw.

That says a lot about the Washington elite and where their misplaced priorities are.


QuickSilver said:
And in violation of the Constitution. Only the President can negotiate foreign policy. The congress wants to derail any successful negotiations with Iran regarding their nuclear program by placing sanctions on them... This will naturally cause Iran to walk away from the talks with the Administration and go full speed ahead with their program... So I have to wonder why Netanyahu doesn't want peaceful negotiations to continue? Does he WANT the US to go to war with Iran? Probably so... so WE can fight his war for him.. with OUR blood and treasure.

Fortunately the President can veto any Sanctions Bill.. and NOW the Democratic Senators who supported Sanctions have pulled back.. so the veto will not be over-ridden. But this whole thing is just nasty business and more evidence that the GOP will go to ANY means to demean and oppose this President no matter what.. even if it hurts our country and sends our troops back to war. Man... they love war.
Click to expand...

Well said, I agree.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution

[h=1]War Powers Resolution[/h]
The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541–1548)[SUP][1][/SUP] is a federal law intended to check the president's power to commit the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States Congress joint resolution; this provides that the President can send U.S. armed forces into action abroad only by declaration of war by Congress, "statutory authorization," or in case of "a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces."
The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war. The resolution was passed by two-thirds of Congress, overriding a presidential veto. It has been alleged that the War Powers Resolution has been violated in the past, for example, by President Clinton in 1999, during the bombing campaign in Kosovo. Congress has disapproved all such incidents, but none has resulted in any successful legal actions being taken against the president for alleged violations.[SUP][2][/SUP]
..............................

I believe this allows the President to commit to armed conflict immediately. But then the Congress has to be called on to make it a real war and not just the Presidents only call. So after 60 days it must be a real war according to what Congress determines or the troops must be called back.
 
In the US we have about 30% that are Democrats, 30% that are Republicans, and the remaining 40% are independents. Those independents are of the various socialist, communist, what ever's for this or that, types. So neither Republican or Democrat party can claim total control of our government until those unregistered independents help decide who they wish would lead the US.

My preference would be to eliminate these national parties and only allow voting by name and goals.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top